LAist: To LA, or not to LA; That's the NFL Question

bigbadjon

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:55:56 -0800

It seems to me that perhaps the NFL has already "lost" LA. The comments at the end of the article about how LA is not even on a top 5 list is probably due to the fact that there has been no realistic prospect at a real stadium being built. That being said, just because a new stadium and/or convention center is built in some craptacular neighborhood with the hopes of sprucing the area up, doesn't always work (see: Washington DC Convention Center... Scary). I for one, hope a pro football team could at some point come to SoCal, just because it seems ridiculous that there isn't, and I'm a huge football fan. That being said, if LA could become the new hotbed for American Soccer with a stadium not in Carson, that'd be cool too.

yaknow

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:35:56 -0800

RFK stadium worked for years in one of the worst parts of DC. ...thanks to their awesome public transportation system. They won't be able to justify the tax dollars for it for another 30 years anyway when they can't even pick up the trash on what they're getting now.

thecoloured

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:16:36 -0800

c'mon. City of Industry? Rly?

db

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:24:00 -0800

What a stupid idea. Hopefully it will be built. That way, when it fails miserably in 2015 we'll be guaranteed another 20 or 30 glorious years without a pro football team. By that time Zach will be a seasoned county supervisor and we'll have such a killer public transportation system, it won't matter where the stadium is located.

eastside502

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:01:24 -0800

We already have UCLA and that other school, why do we need the NFL? Oh, because our tax dollar could help some schmo ownership out?

ezfinn

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:03:19 -0800

Please, no.